↓ Skip to main content

The Challenges of Incorporating Cultural Ecosystem Services into Environmental Assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
2 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
210 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
551 Mendeley
Title
The Challenges of Incorporating Cultural Ecosystem Services into Environmental Assessment
Published in
Ambio, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s13280-013-0386-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debra Satz, Rachelle K. Gould, Kai M. A. Chan, Anne Guerry, Bryan Norton, Terre Satterfield, Benjamin S. Halpern, Jordan Levine, Ulalia Woodside, Neil Hannahs, Xavier Basurto, Sarah Klain

Abstract

The ecosystem services concept is used to make explicit the diverse benefits ecosystems provide to people, with the goal of improving assessment and, ultimately, decision-making. Alongside material benefits such as natural resources (e.g., clean water, timber), this concept includes-through the 'cultural' category of ecosystem services-diverse non-material benefits that people obtain through interactions with ecosystems (e.g., spiritual inspiration, cultural identity, recreation). Despite the longstanding focus of ecosystem services research on measurement, most cultural ecosystem services have defined measurement and inclusion alongside other more 'material' services. This gap in measurement of cultural ecosystem services is a product of several perceived problems, some of which are not real problems and some of which can be mitigated or even solved without undue difficulty. Because of the fractured nature of the literature, these problems continue to plague the discussion of cultural services. In this paper we discuss several such problems, which although they have been addressed singly, have not been brought together in a single discussion. There is a need for a single, accessible treatment of the importance and feasibility of integrating cultural ecosystem services alongside others.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 551 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 1%
Canada 5 <1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Sweden 4 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Norway 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 517 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 124 23%
Student > Master 108 20%
Researcher 91 17%
Student > Bachelor 35 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 5%
Other 82 15%
Unknown 83 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 238 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 12%
Social Sciences 49 9%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 17 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 2%
Other 46 8%
Unknown 124 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,647,556
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#292
of 1,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,809
of 193,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.